The information contained in corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports is a controversial issue, and it has generated an important debate among academics regarding company disclosure strategies. Environmental matters are especially relevant given their impact on sustainable development. The present study has two objectives. The first is to determine which Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) environmental indicators are reported less frequently. The second is to predict the evolution of these indicators in light of the institutional pressures that companies try to resist. Specifically, the study of the environmental dimension of the GRI focusses on an analysis of the following: materials, energy, water, biodiversity, emissions, effluents and waste, products and services, compliance, transport, environmental assessment, and environmental grievance mechanisms. A content analysis of CSR reports from some of the world's largest companies reveals that the indicators least disclosed by companies relate to the environmental aspects of biodiversity. The dissemination of environmental indicators is influenced by normative, mimetic, and (to a lesser extent) coercive pressures. In addition, we observe that mimetic institutional pressures under a national and industrial vision influence the dissemination of environmental information. In terms of cultural dimensions, companies located in long-term, feminine, and collectivist countries tend to disseminate environmental information accordingly.

The complexity of the business world and current business models has motivated an increasing number of companies to disclose corporate information through sustainability reports. This reporting and stakeholders engagement may bring shared value to business and society in general although working towards sustainable development goals. This work adopts a new analytical approach by determining the global reporting initiative indicators related to labour practices and decent work, human rights, society, and product responsibility that are reported less frequently by companies. The final

Great efforts focus on early detection of autism spectrum disorder, although some scientists and policy-makers have questioned early universal screening. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the different screening tools. Several electronic databases were used to identify published studies. A Bayesian model was used to estimate the screening accuracy. The pooled sensitivity was 0.72 (95% CI 0.61–0.81), and the specificity was 0.98 (95% CI 0.97–0.99). Subgroup analyses to remove heterogeneity indicated sensitivity was 0.77 (95% CI 0.69–0.84), and specificity was 0.99 (95% CI 0.97–0.99; SD ≤ 0.01). Level 1 screening tools for ASD showed consistent statistically significant results and therefore are adequate to detect autism at 14–36 months. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10803-018-03865-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Background: The prognostic impact of the expression profile of genes recurrently amplified in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) remains controversial. Methods: We investigated the RNA gene expression profile of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4), murine doble minute 4 (MDM4), and platelet derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRA) in 83 primary GBM tumors vs. 42 normal brain tissue samples. Interphase FISH (iFISH) analysis for the four genes, together with analysis of intragenic deletions in EGFR and PDGFRA, were evaluated in parallel at the DNA level. As validation cohort, publicly available RNA gene expression data on 293 samples from 10 different GBM patient series were also studied. Results: At the RNA level, CDK4 was the most frequently overexpressed gene (90%) followed by EGFR (58%) and PDGFRA (58%). Chromosome 7 copy number alterations, i.e., trisomy (49%) and polysomy (44%), showed no clear association with EGFR gene expression levels. In turn, intragenic EGFR deletions were found in 39 patients (47%), including EGFRvIII (46%) in association with EGFRvIVa (4%), EGFRvII (2%) or other EGFR deletions (3%) and PDGFRA deletion of exons 8–9 was found in only two tumors (2%). Conclusions: Overall, none of the gene expression profiles and/or intragenic EGFR deletions showed a significant impact on overall survival of GBM supporting the notion that other still unraveled features of the disease might play a more relevant prognostic role in GBM.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract